Vatican II and its changes

[Joe_5859]

There has been no such confirmation by anyone in Rome – that the SSPX has the authority to ordain priests. So that makes it even more suspect.

I like Catholic Culture’s website in general, but I have noticed on several occasions that they will have little news blurbs for things I don’t see reported anywhere else and for which they offer no external links to any additional sources.

I am skeptical of big stories that only appear in one source. Not that this means the article is untrue. But I’m also not sure it’s information that is meant for general public disclosure seeing as how there is no confirmation from the Vatican press office.

I know the SSPX situation is complicated, and reconciliation is being actively sought in order to avoid full blown schism. So it wouldn’t surprise me that Pope Francis would use back channels to smooth the road to reconciliation by giving tacit approval for them to keep doing what they are doing for now. Even with valid sacraments, though, I cannot understand how some Catholics recommend going to the SSPX as though it were no different than going to any other Catholic parish. For my money, I’d rather wait until things are completely ironed out before going to them for any sacraments.

 

[Walking_Home]

As you note – after Bp. Fellay made it public that he was authorized to sit as judge – Rome confirmed it. Such is not the case – with the ordinations. Bp. Fellay made a public statement — Rome has not come forth to acknowledge it.

In the case of Mother Mary Micaela being authorized to transfer to the SSPX friendly Dominican Sisters of Wanganui – the “source” was the SSPX friendly Sisters. Following the link to their “source” – you get “page does not exist”. Now looking at the Dominican Sisters of Wangnui --archived year 2011 (The Dominican Sisters of Wanganui: 2011) – no hide nor hair mention of this momentous occasion is found. I mean —keeping such an occasion on record – would be of importance – as opposed to gardening news/etc. Makes one wonder what led them to pull the record of such an event. Again – the “source” for the “approval” was from the SSPX side.

As to the SSPX and Argentina. I can see the Pope when he was Card. in Argentina – helping the SSPX gain entry into the country. They are still tied to the Church – though imperfectly/irregular. The help the SSPX received from the Card — does not translate-- that all was well. Here we are years later – with the Card. now Pope Francis. While he has given the SSPX latitude in confessions and marriage (with conditions) — there has been no declaration – that the SSPX is in full communion with the Church.

 

[ProVobis]

The way I understand it is that SSPX priests are valid priests ordained through Apostolic Succession but they are all currently under suspension. Though the excommunications of their bishops were lifted, the suspensions have not been lifted. This will occur if the Personal Prelature is accepted.

That said, there are rumors that the Pope may discontinue the 62 Missal in regular dioceses. Where that puts the FSSP and ICRSS and such is anyone’s guess.

But I repeat, it’s rumors at this point.

 

[Brendan]

For the duration of the year of Mercy ONLY

Pope Francis extended it in perpetuity

https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/...lee-mandate-on-abortion-sspx-confession-83265

 

[Saxum]

That said, there are rumors that the Pope may discontinue the 62 Missal in regular dioceses.

I’ve heard this rumour but I doubt its veracity. Even if true, it would never succeed. As somebody else on the forum said ‘the toothpaste is out of the tube.’ The Extraordinary Form is here to stay and will remain a constant thorn in the flesh to Modernists who hate what it stands for.

 

[Walking_Home]

I’d say the enemies of the EF – are the toxic “trads” themselves.

 

[Saxum]

I’d say the enemies of the EF – are the toxic “trads” themselves.

When I leave the internet world and enter the real world, I never see or hear from ‘toxic trads’ and that’s why I don’t think they really exist. They’re an internet phenomenon.

However, I’ve personally met many priests who outright refuse to allow celebrations of the EF in their parish churches; I’ve met many priests who say they dislike the EF Mass (how can you dislike any Mass?); and I’ve met liberal laity who despise anything that is remotely pre-Vatican II.

Furthermore, the only group of Catholics who are black sheep in the post-conciliar Church are traditionalists. They’re the group every liberal loves to hate. Liberals love ecumenism but think nothing of excluding people who show the slightest interest in the traditional spirituality of the Roman Rite.

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

Yeah, because it wasn’t a couple of toxic trad men that refused my entrance into a TLM low Mass because I was a woman wearing pants. They were just normal.

Suuuuure.

I think the toxicity of the traditional movement is often a direct response to the liberalness of an area. I’ve met normal people who choose to attend TLM. But those people seem to live in areas that are already more conservative and not quite so toxic as far as laws supporting outlandish “values”.

 

[Saxum]

Yeah, because it wasn’t a couple of toxic trad men that refused my entrance into a TLM low Mass because I was a woman wearing pants.

That’s nuts! Are you sure that’s not a vestige of American 1950s conservatism? I’ve never seen that before. Most of the women who attend my local TLM wear blue jeans.

 

[RoseofMary1]

Vatican II produced NO NEW DOGMA. It was a “pastoral” council. Yet, a lot of people act as if ecumenism is now the most important dogma, when it is NOT a dogma of the Catholic faith. In fact, the Catholic church has always held that there is NO salvation outside the Catholic church (Not that those in good faith and not knowing heretics and follow Jesus as much as they can are not saved). Even the Pope has no authority to change Apostolic Tradition and dogmas of the church. What the council did was change the liturgy and the rites. Pope Benedict appointed Father Hess to determine if the Novus Ordo Mass was valid, which was why Pope Benedict changed the words of consecration back, more in line with the Traditional Mass (It’s there to be found…). Think about that for a minute.

As the New World Order is calling for a one-world religion, pray that the Mass is not turned into a “ecumenical Mass” for the one-world religion.

 

[Saxum]

As the New World Order is calling for a one-world religion, pray that the Mass is not turned into a “ecumenical Mass” for the one-world religion.

It could be argued that this has already happened with the OF. After all, that is precisely what the creators of the Ordinary Form wanted. Nevertheless, the Ordinary Form is a valid and licit Mass that is often beautifully celebrated in a traditional manner.

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

Xanthippe_Voorhees:

Yeah, because it wasn’t a couple of toxic trad men that refused my entrance into a TLM low Mass because I was a woman wearing pants.

That’s nuts! Are you sure that’s not a vestige of American 1950s conservatism? I’ve never seen that before. Most of the women who attend my local TLM wear blue jeans.

Nope, it was very much a cultural reaction. Many of the families could not go out to lunch afterward because they would be called “breeders” and told they were destroying the earth. Restaurants would more or less refuse to serve them by putting them on tediously long “wait lists” due to their “party size”. And we’re not talking 10 kids here plus parents and a couple grandparents–some were “only” two parents and 4 kids. Hardly an anomaly for 6 people to want to eat together on a Sunday morning.

I mean, even super liberal people, like the ones I worked with, were subject to mockery. When a co-worker found she was having her 3rd boy in as many years she was asked if she was going to abort. Rather than responding horrified-as any pregnant mother should- she responded without any animosity towards the speaker: “no, it’s too late for that, but DH is going to get snipped and I’m getting my tubes tied during birth.” Plain as day. Also, a few women in my office synced up the time they took their birth control so they’d remind each other. We all knew what the alarms going off at 1 meant.

When I say I live(d) in a toxically liberal place, I mean it. I mean, I was in a doctor’s waiting room pregnant with my 2nd, with my adorable then 15mo. When I asked the nurse if the doctor was accepting patient’s siblings she had the gall to suggest that perhaps I was having a second child because I didn’t love my first. Despite the fact that this child was sporting her sweet, drooly smile and clinging to me. My friend with 4 kids 5 and under was told by her GP to “cut it out” because “your vagina is not a clown car”. Yeah…

So around here, Trads tend to behave VERY badly. Very badly. They see people as for them or against them, and they tend to apply rather ridiculous means tests to do so.

 

[Walking_Home]

Well – toxic trads don’t recognize themselves as toxic. But yes – they sure do exist.

 

[RoseofMary1]

There are also “Masses” where people socialize and gossip all during the Mass. Even if it was a “valid” and “licit” Mass, would it be pleasing to God? If small crumbs of the Eucharist are falling all over the ground and walked on because of Communion in the hand, is that pleasing to God? If celebrating in a Traditional manner makes is better, that says something about it.

 

[Xanthippe_Voorhees]

n. Many of the families could not go out to lunch afterward because they would be called “breeders” and told they were destroying the earth. Restaurants would more or less refuse to serve them by putting them on tediously long “wait lists” due to their “party size”. And we’re not talking 10 kids here plus parents and a couple grandparents–some were “only” two parents and 4 kids. Hardly an anomaly for 6 people to want to eat together on a Sunday morning.

I’ve only ever had an accident when receiving on the tongue, ironically. My little one was being a handful and in order to stop her from careening into the cup minister, an elderly decon, I had to grab her. I nearly choked and a small portion of the Eucharist fell to the ground. I picked it up and consumed it.

But communion on the tongue isn’t 100% protection against mishaps.

 

[Saxum]

There are also “Masses” where people socialize and gossip all during the Mass. Even if it was a “valid” and “licit” Mass, would it be pleasing to God? If small crumbs of the Eucharist are falling all over the ground and walked on because of Communion in the hand, is that pleasing to God? If celebrating in a Traditional manner makes is better, that says something about it.

Here’s something to consider: even if people are gossiping and being irreverent, at least I’ll be there to worship and praise Jesus. At least there’ll be somebody there who loves the Lord and makes reparation for any sacrilege.

 

[RoseofMary1]

At least? That’s the best we can do? No. Pope Benedict, in his Summorum Pontificum stated that the faithful can ask for the Traditional Mass to be said. We do not have to settle.

 

[Debbie_Kono]

Yeah, because it wasn’t a couple of toxic trad men that refused my entrance into a TLM low Mass because I was a woman wearing pants.

Are you sure it wasn’t sedevacantist? They label themselves as Traditional Roman Catholic…at least the one near my house does. And they are very strict on dress.

 

[Walking_Home]

You said :

…only because Bp. Fellay mentioned it in one of his homilies. Had he not, Archbishop Pozzo wouldn’t have commented on the matter, and we’d be seeing the same group of people who make a habit of clutching at straws call into question Bp. Fellay’s right to canonically judge his own priests, just because the Vatican doesn’t hold a press conference for every bit of private correspondence.

Apparently a homily is enough – for Rome to take notice and respond to the claim. Now you are saying the opposite.
When it concerns the SSPX and Rome – info travels fast.

Now I did a google translate of that link you gave :

Press release on the reports concerning priestly ordinations to the priestly brotherhood of Pope Pius X.
06/22/2016

The Bishop of Regensburg welcomes every initiative to overcome a division of the church, to bring the separated groupings back to the Catholic Church and thus to restore the visible unity of the Church.

The priestly ordinations announced in Zaitzkofen on 2 July 2016 are, as the secretary of the Pontifical Commission, Ecclesia Dei, Archbishop Pozzo, declaring at the present time safe. This does not follow their church-law permissibility and also the implicit recognition of the permissibility of the consecration of the bishop of the Brotherhood. The priestly ordinations are merely tolerated and unimpeded. This is the expression of a freely granted concession from the Holy See regarding a hoped-for approach of the priestly brotherhood after a time of intense reflection and examination. The criterion of the recognition of the priestly brotherhood is and remains the unqualified affirmation of the authority of the Second Vatican Council and of all its documents (freedom of religion, ecumenism, etc.).

From what I see – the ordinations of July 2, 2016 were at present time safe, but this does not follow Church law permissibility. The July 2, ordinations are merely tolerated and unimpeded. It looks like concession was for July 2 ordinations.–hoping that the SSPX would reflect on their situation. It goes on to say – that the criteria for the recognition of the SSPX – remains the unqualified affirmation of Vat II and all its documents.

This really does not make it clear – that Rome has given the green flag to all SSPX ordination.

Thank you for the links for Mother Mary Micaela. From reading both --Mother (while still attached to Rome) --had already migrated to SSPX – so I can see Rome letting her go – to make it official.

 

[Debbie_Kono]

Pope Benedict appointed Father Hess to determine if the Novus Ordo Mass was valid, which was why Pope Benedict changed the words of consecration back, more in line with the Traditional Mass (It’s there to be found…). Think about that for a minute.

I did not know this.

Here is a link to five (that have been translated in English) of the nine schemas that were _supposed to be discussed at VII.